(Thread IKs:
fatherboxx)
|
Ms Adequate posted:What they should do is up-armor a shuttle crawler and just roll it over the minefield Mine-clearing strandbeests
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 17:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 10:27 |
|
|
jaete posted:I wonder how well this works though if the mines are buried a bit deeper, or if there are also non-metallic mines which might not get hot in the same way (someone said antipersonnel mines are non-metallic these days). I would presume that any solid non-porous object buried not too deep in relatively homogenous dirt would show in similar way, whether it be metal, plastic or fibreglass. What happens when sun heats topsoil is the humidity in the dirt starts evaporating. As long as there is any water left, the soil won't heat much because of evaporation. But a mine is a solid object that can't give up any moisture, so it and the soil over it dry up quicker and start warming up (and stays warm longer, because the dense solid object acts as a better thermal battery than dirt). The camera doesn't truly see the mine itself but the spot of warm dry dirt on top of it. You have to be pretty specific in the depth a mine is buried for it to work properly, but also for this detection method to work you need ideal weather. Maybe the defender will try to install an automatic sprinkler system to cool their mines in summer  (conversely, in arid areas would it work if you sprayed lots of water over an area and followed in what patterns the ground dried up under sun?)The Lone Badger posted:Do you get mines with non-pressure triggers (magnetic anomaly etc) so they'll survive mine rollers undetonated until they get the exact right signal to detonate? Finnish army has a dual action mine that required magnetic field and shaking to trigger. It's not so much about mine clearance but to prevent a lucky tank from passing over a mine if its tracks don't go over it - it blows up through the bottom plate of the tank. It can also be programmed to detonate not on the first vehicle but the fifth one in column, for instance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:What they should do is up-armor a shuttle crawler and just roll it over the minefield It’s time to reinvent the Panjandrum as a mine clearer, says I. Surely it will work this time!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 18:19
|
|
|
Prism posted:It’s time to reinvent the Panjandrum as a mine clearer, says I. Surely it will work this time! No need, Germany has already sent Bagger on its way to Zaporizzhya!  (at its top speed it will be there in four months)
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 18:36
|
|
|
Stian Jenssen, Director of the Private Office of the NATO Secretary General, suggested today at a Norwegian political thing that Ukraine could give up territory to Russia in exchange for at some stage joining NATO. Seems like a very sharp turn for NATO, that. Article in Norwegian: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/i/jl7V5e/aapner-for-at-ukraina-avgir-territorium-i-bytte-mot-nato-medlemskap Article in Norwegian about Ukraine being very not happy about it: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/i/15Gk7B/ukraina-reagerer-totalt-uakseptabelt-aa-oppgi-territorier quote:- I think that a solution could be for Ukraine to give up territory, and get NATO membership in return, Jenssen said in a panel debate in Arendal on Tuesday morning.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 18:49
|
|
|
TheRat posted:Stian Jenssen, Director of the Private Office of the NATO Secretary General, suggested today at a Norwegian political thing that Ukraine could give up territory to Russia in exchange for at some stage joining NATO. Seems like a very sharp turn for NATO, that. It's a great strategy because Russia won't agree to it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 19:00
|
|
|
MonkeyLibFront posted:It's a great strategy because Russia won't agree to it. At this point it looks like the best case scenario for Ukraine unless they can achieve some kind of breakthrough. It's starting to look like the battle of the somme 3.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 19:26
|
|
|
daslog posted:At this point it looks like the best case scenario for Ukraine unless they can achieve some kind of breakthrough. It's starting to look like the battle of the somme 3. how can something be the best case scenario if it's something the other side would never agree too? Russia started this whole war with one of the reasons being to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO. Them agreeing to Ukrainian NATO-membership would be the same as them losing. At the point Russia agrees to this, Ukrainian troops would already be halfway to Moscow hey, why not drop even more asinine suggestions, like giving West-Ukraine and parts of Poland to Kaliningrad, in exchange for Russia arming Ukraine with nuclear weapons that's an equally stupid thing that will never happen
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 19:35
|
|
|
daslog posted:At this point it looks like the best case scenario for Ukraine unless they can achieve some kind of breakthrough. It's starting to look like the battle of the somme 3. Don't over-anchor future predictions on the present. During Kharkiv people unfamiliar with military matters crowed, "Haha! Ukraine has them on the run! This war might be over by Christmas!" Meanwhile, those who have studied this stuff said, "Eh, no. It's going to be hard to push that fast for more than about five days unless they have follow-on forces, which they don't seem to have yet." Same thing here. It's entirely possible that this war goes the way of Korea or Iran-Iraq and becomes static for years, but I don't think it will so long as the West continues to increase ammunition production and provides it to Ukraine. The quality of Ukraine's tactical commanders seem to be quite good (though they have lost many of their best), and their operational commanders are getting better. The quality of Russia's operational commanders has at best remained static, and in many places gotten worse. Meanwhile, over time they are losing the superiority of fires they enjoyed through 2022.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 19:36
|
|
|
daslog posted:At this point it looks like the best case scenario for Ukraine unless they can achieve some kind of breakthrough. It's starting to look like the battle of the somme 3. How so? Would have agreeing to a white peace with Japan had been better than invasion in 1945 given the massive casualties involved with a large portion of China and East Asia still occupied by Japan? What about with Germany in 1944? Can Russia really afford this war for as long? Ultimately the Ukrainian people seem to still be very supportive of continuing the war, and its the people of Ukraine via their democratically elected government who get to decide. The best case scenario for Ukraine is for Russia to withdraw.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 19:57
|
|
|
TheRat posted:Stian Jenssen, Director of the Private Office of the NATO Secretary General, suggested today at a Norwegian political thing that Ukraine could give up territory to Russia in exchange for at some stage joining NATO. Seems like a very sharp turn for NATO, that. I imagine the reasoning behind this is that 'settling any existing territorial disputes' is supposed to be a prerequisite for a Membership Action Plan to join NATO. So if Ukraine renounces the occupied parts of Ukraine, it has no active territorial disputes, therefore can start joining NATO. If that is what the guy was trying to say, he certainly could have phrased it much, much better. I don't think the whole MAP process is actually a formal part of the NATO charter and if the members unanimously voted Ukraine in tomorrow, they could join (though being involved in an active war may disqualify them, I am not a NATO accession expert).
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 20:00
|
|
|
Kaiser Schnitzel posted:I don't think the whole MAP process is actually a formal part of the NATO charter and if the members unanimously voted Ukraine in tomorrow, they could join (though being involved in an active war may disqualify them, I am not a NATO accession expert). Ukraine's NATO membership is meaningless unless other members want to defend Ukraine against Russian aggression, and in an ongoing war this would then mean that other NATO countries become belligerents in the war and send troops to liberate Ukrainian territory. But that is not desirable to any current NATO member, or if it was they could have already gone to war on their own. So it's not going to happen. So either NATO 'lets in' Ukraine and then does nothing to interfere in the ongoing war. Which serves no purpose. Or somehow a peace is reached and Ukraine joins. But that's not happening in the immediate foreseeable future.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 20:17
|
|
|
At a certain point, Ukraine's best move to reclaim their land may be to invade Russia proper and occupy their land to trade back in a peace deal. This is a bad idea for many reasons, but if the Ukrainian leadership get too bogged down on the current lines it may be a tempting hope.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 20:41
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:At a certain point, Ukraine's best move to reclaim their land may be to invade Russia proper and occupy their land to trade back in a peace deal. This is a bad idea for many reasons, but if the Ukrainian leadership get too bogged down on the current lines it may be a tempting hope. I have long ago proposed a better plan than that, which is to divide into two nations, one of which is official Ukraine and another one is a separatist, anti-NATO Wukraine that also has a gerrymandered territory mostly made of a couple of roads that lead all the way to Donbas and Crimea. They briefly invade Polish territory and crap on the Polish flag and a picture of John Paul II, after which NATO has no choice but to counter attack. This might sound like a terrible idea but it's really not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 20:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1691529234613673984
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:How so? Would have agreeing to a white peace with Japan had been better than invasion in 1945 given the massive casualties involved with a large portion of China and East Asia still occupied by Japan? What about with Germany in 1944? Can Russia really afford this war for as long? Ultimately the Ukrainian people seem to still be very supportive of continuing the war, and its the people of Ukraine via their democratically elected government who get to decide. I agree, and I think that another thing to remember is that Russian society has a wide variety of crises that it is confronting simultaneously here. In addition to the disabling effects of corruption, the faltering war itself, and the economic stagflation that have gripped the Russian state, the societal fabric is being pulled apart in less visible ways. Huge numbers of the wealthy and middle-class have fled the country, adding to a persistent decrease in fertility and population growth. Lack of education and unemployment are challenging the remaining population, despite unsustainable military spending. Alcoholism, injection drug usage, and depression plague the population. Consequently, HIV and Hep C rates have become an epidemic, particularly amongst the military-aged. Domestic violence rates have become shockingly ubiquitous. Life expectancy statistics have been steadily declining, while retirement age is being raised. Family and community strife related to at least one of these issues is nearly universal. The social contract is visibly fraying. It’s a host of problems, and they are catalyzed by each other and the war. The specifics for each of these issues are horrifying and would challenge even an otherwise functional society. And while it’s fair to point out that many of these problems predate the war, and aren’t likely to individually impair Russia’s effort, the collective impact of all these issues represent a ticking clock for Putin. Many experts agree that meaningful reform on these sorts of problems is impossible without political change. Maybe it will take decades, but Russian society appears to be in a serious and perhaps unavoidable decline. Whether the minefields can hold off the Ukrainians or not - this war is only going to get harder for Russia to continue fighting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
Dirt5o8 posted:Generally, the clearing and proofing method will try to cover all your bases but the vast majority of them literally beat the poo poo out of the mine to induce detonation. Most mines are super cheap since they are made for massive deployment. Even raising the cost a little changes the cost factor to use them a lot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:12
|
|
|
Kaal posted:It’s a host of problems, and they are catalyzed by each other and the war. The specifics for each of these issues are horrifying and would challenge even an otherwise functional society. And while it’s fair to point out that many of these problems predate the war, and aren’t likely to individually impair Russia’s effort, the collective impact of all these issues represent a ticking clock for Putin. Many experts agree that meaningful reform on these sorts of problems is impossible without political change. Maybe it will take decades, but Russian society appears to be in a serious and perhaps unavoidable decline. Whether the minefields can hold off the Ukrainians or not - this war is only going to get harder for Russia to continue fighting. The good thing for Putin and his inner circle (and mostly the core support for the war in 50+ age range) is that they are unlikely to live to see the effects of things you have mentioned, in a completely natural way - especially the demographic issues that will only hit once workforce will need the 2020-2023 born.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
Libluini posted:how can something be the best case scenario if it's something the other side would never agree too? Feels like a silly question but I'll answer it anyway. If the Ukraine cannot take any more territory back from the Russians then they are best hope is to hope that they can join the NATO after a negotiated settlement.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:16
|
|
|
It's going to be interesting to see where this goes and what we will learn of the Russian defense later on. Russian defense of the first line seemed really aggressive, as if the command thought that the offensive could be stopped dead on its tracks instead of defense in depth. Now this appears to have changed, the reason for which remains to be seen. Were Russian frontline troops losing too many men holding the lines? Or were their artillery losing too many guns or not receiving enough ammunition to stop the Ukrainian spearheads? Or is this all according to plan of Shoigu and Gerasimov and Ukrainians will be delivered a fatal blow at the main line? Gotta stay tuned!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:20
|
|
|
daslog posted:Feels like a silly question but I'll answer it anyway. If the Ukraine cannot take any more territory back from the Russians then they are best hope is to hope that they can join the NATO after a negotiated settlement. Isn't this like saying the USSR should have sued for peace once Stalingrad was mostly taken? We don't know yet if this is where the front is going to settle for the foreseeable future or if the situation will regain fluidity and shift back to being a maneuver war at some point. Ukraine might be facing set backs currently but they still had significant successes earlier in the war and the situation can change at any point with more supplies, funding, and training from the West. As Winston Churchill asked of Roosevelt, "give us the tools and we'll finish the job."
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:22
|
|
|
The ideal scenario is obviously Ukraine returns to their 2013 borders and then there's no potential legal issues with joining the EU or NATO. If they can't do that, it's up to Ukraine to decide how much time, blood and money to spend before declaring the remaining occupied land as gone for good and severing it in a peace deal so they can then go and join NATO+EU. Ukraine knows the peace deal will never ensure their protection from Russia, but they need it to happen before they can get NATO membership that will actually protect them. One of the reasons they're not doing this now, aside from Russia seeming to be on the back foot, is they need to recover a lot of ports, industry and agricultural land that is necessary for them to prosper as a state even if they're under NATO. It's not just about ending the war, it's also about the quality of life for the people of Ukraine after the war. With the massive amount of population losses to war and emigration, the enormous economic burden of the war, future military spending and reconstruction, Ukraine could easily fail as a state if they don't get enough key resources back in the peace deal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:33
|
|
|
daslog posted:Feels like a silly question but I'll answer it anyway. If the Ukraine cannot take any more territory back from the Russians then they are best hope is to hope that they can join the NATO after a negotiated settlement. Wouldn't the Russia just try to freeze the conflict rather than agree to any negotiation that lets Ukraine join NATO?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:34
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Isn't this like saying the USSR should have sued for peace once Stalingrad was mostly taken? We don't know yet if this is where the front is going to settle for the foreseeable future or if the situation will regain fluidity and shift back to being a maneuver war at some point. Ukraine might be facing set backs currently but they still had significant successes earlier in the war and the situation can change at any point with more supplies, funding, and training from the West. I stated in the original post that if they can't achieve a breakthrough then this is the best outcome. Obviously achieving a breakthrough is preferable and hence why I thought it was kind of a silly post.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:41
|
|
|
poor waif posted:Wouldn't the Russia just try to freeze the conflict rather than agree to any negotiation that lets Ukraine join NATO?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:42
|
|
|
daslog posted:Yes that's why it's the best outcome Ukraine cannot achieve breakthrough. Do you subscribe to the view that Ukraine should sue for peace after the first failed offensive?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:43
|
|
|
poor waif posted:Wouldn't the Russia just try to freeze the conflict rather than agree to any negotiation that lets Ukraine join NATO? That seems like the most likely outcome, yes. As long as NATO's promise of long-term support remains credible, I don't see Ukraine having more incentive to try and negotiate a settlement over freezing the conflict and waiting for Russia to rot away sufficiently from within either. Slashrat fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Aug 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:44
|
|
|
daslog posted:Yes that's why it's the best outcome Ukraine cannot achieve breakthrough. Russia has been demanding that NATO returns to its 1997 borders, why would they now suddenly agree to let Ukraine join NATO? It doesn't seem to fit anything else they've been saying lately. It would be a strategic defeat for Russia.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:53
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Do you subscribe to the view that Ukraine should sue for peace after the first failed offensive? If I'm on the Ukrainian side, I fight to the last man. That could mean decades of guerrilla warfare but I still do it. If I'm the president of the United States, I think it's a much more difficult calculation. There has to be some sort of progress that I can leverage to convince my constituents that there is still hope for the Ukraine side to win. If there isn't any progress to point to then it becomes a lot more difficult. Thousands of additional people will die in a protracted stale mate where no one wins. I try to push for a solution on both sides to stop the fighting before I get into the campaign cycle for my next reelection.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:53
|
|
|
I think if a US president gives up in an ally after the first failed offensive, then that person lacks moral courage. Anyone can do the right thing when it's easy. When things are hard, and people doubt? That's when a leader shows his or her worth. See also: Zelenskyy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:56
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:I think if a US president gives up in an ally after the first failed offensive, then that person lacks moral courage. Anyone can do the right thing when it's easy. When things are hard, and people doubt? That's when a leader shows his or her worth. See also: Zelenskyy. Have you seen our presidents lately? They are not exactly the type of leaders that people look up to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 21:59
|
|
|
I don't think that either Russia would accept that even Ukraine without Donetsk and Luhansk regions and parts of Kherson and Zaporizhye region accepted to NATO or NATO would accept Ukraine with the current Russian warmongering regime in charge (and thus, perpetual danger of another invasion).
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 22:01
|
|
|
Regarding resiliency, as different as politics in the West is between now and 1945, it should show how much loss these nations potentially can deal with and still turn it around into an all-out victory. We completely lost France. Offensives like Dieppe and Market Garden were disasters that cost thousands of lives. I'm sure people were discouraged and thought "maybe we can't do this" back then. But they stuck to it and turned it around. And as many problems as we have socially, politically and economically now, we had it a lot worse statistically back then across the board. No guarantee NATO will do the right thing today, but just saying there is historical precedent for it happening, even if Ukraine's current offensive were to stall where it is right now until next spring.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 22:02
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:I don't think that either Russia would accept that even Ukraine without Donetsk and Luhansk regions and parts of Kherson and Zaporizhye region accepted to NATO or NATO would accept Ukraine with the current Russian warmongering regime in charge (and thus, perpetual danger of another invasion). There is also the issue of Ukraine not wanting to give the West an excuse to go back to business as usual with Russia while parts of the country are occupied.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 22:02
|
|
|
daslog posted:Have you seen our presidents lately? They are not exactly the type of leaders that people look up to. Are you arguing what you think "will" happen or what you think "should" happen? I thought we were discussing the latter, but I may have misunderstood you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 22:06
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Are you arguing what you think "will" happen or what you think "should" happen? I thought we were discussing the latter, but I may have misunderstood you. I'm a pragmatist. The idealist in me thinks that a bullet in Putin's brain is what should happen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 22:20
|
|
|
OzyMandrill posted:There's an article I read recently interviewing sappers, and Russia is deploying anti personnel mines that use seismic footstep sensors, and shoot a charge up to chest height to explode razor shards 360 degrees up to 30m. Those are the most feared. POM3 I think they are called? Is that in English? I'd love to read it. I haven't seen a breakdown of what mines are in use, I'm just working on the assumption that the massive, truck laid minefields are the standard surface-lay variety. Cheap and easy to produce
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 22:26
|
|
|
daslog posted:I'm a pragmatist. The idealist in me thinks that a bullet in Putin's brain is what should happen. Okay. I'd say that pragmatically, we shouldn't support allies only until their first failed offensive, but instead until victory. To do otherwise would be to cheapen the value our allies place in our leadership in the world, and would encourage the petty tyrannies which are so anathament the democracy here at home.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 22:46
|
|
|
The road to hell is paved with pragmatic intentions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 22:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 10:27 |
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Okay. I'd say that pragmatically, we shouldn't support allies only until their first failed offensive, but instead until victory. To do otherwise would be to cheapen the value our allies place in our leadership in the world, and would encourage the petty tyrannies which are so anathament the democracy here at home. Do you think we're actually going to do that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 22:52
|
|